Author Topic: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing  (Read 3254 times)

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7261
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #45 on: April 02, 2019, 10:56:58 AM »
I do feel like with the development on the edge of downtown (particularly the areas inf Brooklyn, northern San Marco, and southern Springfield) will help downtown. I'm not sure how long this will take.

I do realize that this is sort of the barbell theory that I've agreed with lake is not realistic though.

Will it help? Yes. At the pace that Riverside helped Brooklyn and Brooklyn helped LaVilla. I guess in another 20 years we can get back to infilling the actual downtown core.
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29257
    • Modern Cities
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #46 on: April 02, 2019, 11:15:31 AM »
If "downtown" is defined as the Northbank, that barbell theory will take another 20 to 30 years to play out. If that's what Jax wants, that's fine but I don't think people realize a Shipyards alone takes a decade or two to fill out itself before it stimulates enough growth to connect with a district a mile away at the pedestrian scale.

On the other hand, you could funnel a good $20 to $30 million in updating and filling storefronts on Laura/Hogan between Hemming and the Landing or Adams between Pearl and Ocean and have a Clematis Street type environment in the heart of the city before Curry leaves office. The individual projects won't grab media headlines or interest suburbanites but the final product would be a "game changer" and would take 1/4 the revitalization time to pull off.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29257
    • Modern Cities
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #47 on: April 02, 2019, 11:26:44 AM »
For the first time in my life - and I go back a ways here - I've essentially given up hope for downtown Jax. Everytime we get momentum, the city either abandons it, or worse, starts meddling to the point that we take a step back for every one we take forward. Fortunately, we're seeing other neighborhoods really take off even if the loud sucking sound in the center of it all will apparently continue.

I hold out hope that we can pull ourselves together but my dose of reality came after a 2007 Toronto trip. I've pretty much been a realist ever since when it comes to downtown's future. Fortunately.....like every other city, btw....we are witnessing the transformation of our urban neighborhoods which is due to there being more opportunity for a larger percentage of the population to be a part of rebirth and revitalization. However, we can't become a place where we accept a substandard downtown because we have great neighborhoods surrounding it.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2019, 12:02:02 PM by thelakelander »
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Steve

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2755
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #48 on: April 02, 2019, 11:50:49 AM »
If "downtown" is defined as the Northbank, that barbell theory will take another 20 to 30 years to play out. If that's what Jax wants, that's fine but I don't think people realize a Shipyards alone takes a decade or two to fill out itself before it stimulates enough growth to connect with a district a mile away at the pedestrian scale.

On the other hand, you could funnel a good $20 to $30 million in updating and filling storefronts on Laura/Hogan between Hemming and the Landing or Adams between Pearl and Ocean and have a Clematis Street type environment in the heart of the city before Curry leaves office. The individual projects won't grab media headlines or interest suburbanites but the final product would be a "game changer" and would take 1/4 the revitalization time to pull off.

This I completely agree with. When DVI was Started, we seemed to realize the core theory, which is why their original borders were Broad Street, Church Street, Market Street, and Prudential Drive. Now Personally I would have done Liberty vs. Market, State vs. Church, and kept it Northbank only but the concept was in the right direction.

Charles Hunter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2572
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #49 on: April 02, 2019, 12:12:49 PM »
Yesterday, on one of the local TV news stations, I saw a report about a UNF professor's recent study that showed making the 1-way streets downtown 2-way would improve economics and safety. Now, my Google-foo is failing me, as I cannot find the story online.  As I recall, the reporter contacted the city, and was told there are no current plans to do so.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29257
    • Modern Cities
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #50 on: April 02, 2019, 12:21:21 PM »
I have an article in que that I never finished that focuses on alternative downtown improvements that $18 million in Landing money could have been spent on. According the the DIA's CRA plan from a few years back, the entire two-way street thing would cost a little less than $10 million. In the grand scheme of what we been tossing money to over the last year, that's peanuts. Thus priorities, not capital costs or market dynamics, are a major reason of why I've been a realistic towards what downtown will and won't become any time soon over the last decade. This stuff isn't rocket science and it doesn't take an act of congress to resolve.

Unless, there's a change in administrative direction (I'm wishful that there will be), it is what it is for the next four years. Went through this with the Peyton and Brown administrations. Luckily neither did much to ruin what was still standing.  So, if we stay the course, then the hope is that we don't screw up things with all the demos (yes, a structurally sound vacant building is better than a vacant lot), that the Northbank will have an easier opportunity with whoever comes in next.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2019, 12:30:07 PM by thelakelander »
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

vicupstate

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3077
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #51 on: April 02, 2019, 01:04:49 PM »
The political situation in JAX is a huge problem, IMO. First, the local politics is WAY more partisan than most cities, which serves no good purpose. Urbanism and local services are not political in nature to begin with. Partisan politics merely creates needless division and animosity.

Second, no one can serve as Mayor more than eight years, and realistically only four if they are a Democrat. So the turnover is very high and the continuity non-existant. Even the full eight years isn't very long. Also when a Republican wins their first term, noboby of substance even runs against them in four years, because they know the seat will be open the next time. It is a bad cycle and the a very difficult one to break. 
"The problem with quotes on the internet is you can never be certain they're authentic." - Abraham Lincoln

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7261
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #52 on: April 02, 2019, 03:48:32 PM »
For the first time in my life - and I go back a ways here - I've essentially given up hope for downtown Jax. Everytime we get momentum, the city either abandons it, or worse, starts meddling to the point that we take a step back for every one we take forward. Fortunately, we're seeing other neighborhoods really take off even if the loud sucking sound in the center of it all will apparently continue.

I hold out hope that we can pull ourselves together but my dose of reality came after a 2007 Toronto trip. I've pretty much been a realist ever since when it comes to downtown's future. Fortunately.....like every other city, btw....we are witnessing the transformation of our urban neighborhoods which is due to there being more opportunity for a larger percentage of the population to be a part of rebirth and revitalization. However, we can't become a place where we accept a substandard downtown because we have great neighborhoods surrounding it.

As you often say, Jax is what it is. Downtown is worth continuing to push for, but the unfortunate reality is that we're way behind our peers and are spinning our wheels. For every encouraging sign, there's a discouraging one. I guess the good news is that more people are out here wanting to see a vibrant downtown than I've ever seen, even if the city is just trotting out the same risky silver bullets and failed strategies.
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?

Kerry

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1168
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #53 on: April 02, 2019, 03:59:41 PM »
The political situation in JAX is a huge problem, IMO. First, the local politics is WAY more partisan than most cities, which serves no good purpose. Urbanism and local services are not political in nature to begin with. Partisan politics merely creates needless division and animosity.

Second, no one can serve as Mayor more than eight years, and realistically only four if they are a Democrat. So the turnover is very high and the continuity non-existant. Even the full eight years isn't very long. Also when a Republican wins their first term, noboby of substance even runs against them in four years, because they know the seat will be open the next time. It is a bad cycle and the a very difficult one to break.

As we discussed the other night, I would be all for changing the make-up of City government.  Reduce the number of council members and switch to a City Manager government.  I don't know what can be done about JTA and their existence but any City which can't control their own transportation is going to have a difficult time.
Third Place

Charles Hunter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2572
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #54 on: April 02, 2019, 08:35:21 PM »
My guess is that changing the Charter as significantly as Kerry suggests would require approval by the Legislature. Since the Legislature would be involved anyway, they could also change the law establishing how JTA is set up.

However, although there is merit in his suggestion, I think the chances are slim.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29257
    • Modern Cities
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #55 on: April 12, 2019, 02:35:00 PM »
Jacksonville Jaguars President Mark Lamping's thoughts on the Jax Landing:

Quote
Asked his opinion about The Jacksonville Landing site that the city wants to demolish along the Downtown riverfront, Lamping said the central business district is missing a central gathering point.

“You’ve got this beautiful view by the Main Street Bridge and making that accessible to more and more people, opening up the view corridors from Downtown, having our expectations being broader than just five or six blocks Downtown” is important.

“I think just taking a little pause on the Landing might make a lot of sense because I believe Downtown’s better days are ahead of us,” he said.

Lamping said that by waiting to decide its use and possibly turning it into a park during that time is advantageous.

“Ultimately, when things really get going, you could really achieve exactly what the community needs in that spot,” he said.

Full article: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/jaguars-remain-committed-to-lot-j-development-near-stadium



Historical Reality:


In the past, that gathering point was Hemming Park


For the last 30 years, it's been the Landing's courtyard

While DT has its issues, places to gather aren't one of them. However, reasons to gather on a consistent basis are.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Kerry

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1168
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #56 on: April 12, 2019, 02:52:41 PM »
What a tool and proof positive that no one at the Jags organization knows diddley squat about urban development - hell, they barely know anything about football.  All you need is 2,000 employees and great things will follow?  Really, explain the 10's of thousands that work downtown NOW and yet nothing amazing is happening - ever.  Hell - their very own Lot J vision isn't even taking advantage of the existing workforce.  What a jackass.

Here is my favorite line though.

Quote
He said that to revitalize a neighborhood, “you need to have a base of people that are working there every day. Then hopefully that will lead to people living there.”

No, the first thing you need is an actual neighborhood to revitalize.  You are trying to revitalize an f'ing parking lot.  And again, if all you need are the jobs and then housing will magically follow, where is all the dammed downtown housing for the 10's of thousands of people that already work downtown?

Finally, for those that didn't think JEA was the core component of Lot J, what more proof do you need?  Alas, at least Khan remains committed to Lot J, but who the hell knows where they are going to find 2,000 jobs to kick it off with.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2019, 02:56:59 PM by Kerry »
Third Place

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29257
    • Modern Cities
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #57 on: April 12, 2019, 04:17:24 PM »
^Lampings comments do come off as self serving when it comes to the Landing site and what Lot J will or won't do for DT.

1. Kerry you're right about the 2k employees and they'll come quote. The Northbank has been well over that for over a century. If anything, it would suggest that Lot J be developed at the Landing site to take advantage of that market segment.

2. The Cordish Power & Light comparisons are pretty off-base in terms of context. The Power & Light District is in downtown Kansas City. Not at Arrowhead. The Power & Light District also includes a mix of adaptive reuse of historic buildings and new infill and is sandwiched between Kansas City's financial district and the Crossroads Arts District....all of which are denser than Jax's Northbank, much less a surface parking lot around a stadium a mile away. It's even named after an art deco highrise completed in 1931 that anchors it.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2019, 04:19:29 PM by thelakelander »
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

MusicMan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1788
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #58 on: April 12, 2019, 04:34:41 PM »
I went into the Old Barnett bank Building today to see what the finished UNF spaces looked like.  They were decent, but empty. No one that I could see was using them at all.
However, from the 5th floor you could see directly into the other 2 Laura Street trio buildings, and I want to tell you, for all the hullabaloo surrounding those wonderful structures, they are YEARS away from being activated into the scene. YEARS folks..... 

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29257
    • Modern Cities
Re: So, Jax May Be The Only City To Demolish Its Landing
« Reply #59 on: April 12, 2019, 04:48:27 PM »
Yeah, once construction starts, you're probably looking at 24-36 months. Before construction can begin, the crews will have to complete the Barnett and the Trio will need to still go through the DDRB process. So yeah, a good three or four years at a minimum. This is why if you care anything about the time it takes to do stuff, you'd keep the Landing, remodel and revamp the mix of uses in it. Given the condition of the buildings, that's likely a one to two year process.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2019, 04:50:36 PM by thelakelander »
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali